Questions tagged [logic]

Questions about mathematical logic, including model theory, proof theory, computability theory (a.k.a. recursion theory), and non-standard logics. Questions which merely seek to apply logical or formal reasoning to other areas of mathematics should not use this tag. Consider using one of the following tags as well, if they fit the question: (model-theory), (set-theory), (computability), and (proof-theory). This tag is not for logical puzzles, use (puzzle).

This tag broadly covers the field of mathematical logic, which deals with questions involving formalized mathematical statements, mathematical structures, and their relationships. The development of mathematical logic in the late 19th and early 20th centuries was intertwined with the interest in foundations of mathematics (), although much current work in logic is not directly related to foundations.

The elementary content of mathematical logic involves formal mathematical languages, quantifiers, and formal proofs of statements. These formal proofs are carried out in formal proof systems (see ), which model ordinary mathematical reasoning but, unlike natural language proofs, have a fully specified syntax and grammar that could in principle be verified mechanically. Specific tags for these topics include and . The full development of these ideas happens in the field of . A well known application of proof-theoretic methods is Gödel's incompleteness theorem .

The field of studies models of formal languages. Examples include algebraic structures such as groups and rings, as well as more esoteric structures. The field focuses on definability within such structures, relative to particular formal languages.

The field of studies formalized notations of computability, such as Turing computability and hyperarithmetical computability, as well as their applications to mathematics.

The field of studies sets by considering formal axiomatic systems of set theory such as ZFC. Questions about basic topics that might be found in "Chapter 0" of an undergraduate textbook (such as unions, intersections, subsets, etc.) are classified on this site as , while the includes questions about models of ZFC, large cardinals, the method of forcing, etc. Some researchers view set theory as part of mathematical logic, while others view it as a distinct area; the logic tag is not mandatory for set theory questions.

There are other areas which overlap with mathematical logic, but are not always considered part of it. The field of has many similarities to logic, and has important foundational aspects.

The foundational aspects of logic include mathematical constructivism, which is classified here as .


This tag does not include questions about ordinary logical reasoning in mathematical proof writing. Questions that ask about the logical structure or logical methods of ordinary mathematical proofs should be labeled with the tag unless they ask about specific formal proof systems.

This tag should not be used for what a layperson might called "a logical puzzle". For these sort of questions please use and as appropriate. (Unless the solution is done via a method relevant to the logic tag, of course.)

27971 questions
2
votes
2 answers

Is Addition Defined for Nominal Numbers?

A nominal number is a symbol of a number used for naming. Wikipedia defines it as a " a one-to-one and onto function from a set of objects being named to a set of numerals. . . it is a function because each object is assigned a single numeral, it…
Thurber
  • 21
2
votes
1 answer

Propositional Logic - Is my answer correct?

I have a question relating to Propositional Logic. Any help will be greatly appreciated. Without changing the meaning of the following formulæ, which rely on operator precedence to be interpreted correctly, introduce brackets in each so that no…
2
votes
3 answers

Negating "If no one is absent, then if the weather permits, we will study outside"

I am a beginner; please help solve this. Write the negation of the statement: "If no one is absent, then if the weather permits, we will study outside."
2
votes
2 answers

Are the axioms for the real numbers consistent?

Well, we know that for any set of axioms, it is necessary that no axiom or a conjunction of axioms contradict some other axiom. How do we know that this holds in the field, order and completeness axioms of the real number system?
Indrayudh Roy
  • 2,256
  • 13
  • 22
2
votes
1 answer

Proof-Reading My Answer For a Logic Question

The question is “Replace the formula (p→(q→¬r))→(¬p→q) by an equivalent formula not involving ¬ or →”. (p→(q→¬r))→(¬p→q) ≡(p→(¬q∨¬r))→(p∨q) ≡(p→¬(q∧r))→(p∨q) ≡(¬p∨¬(q∧r))→(p∨q) ≡¬(p∧(q∧r))→(p∨q) ≡(p∧(q∧r))∨(p∨q) A second part to the question then…
2
votes
1 answer

Prove of definability cycle-free graphs

Prove that the class of all cycle-free graphs can not be defined by a finite set of formulas. I don't understand what definiability means in this context. Does it just mean that I could represent all cycle-free graphs with finitely many formulas?…
Mark
  • 3,109
2
votes
3 answers

different domains for each variable in predicate logic

Before I begin, note that this is significantly outside what I've studied, so if it's a load of crap just let me know. Up till now, everything I've covered assumes the same domain for all variables. I'm trying to define an arbitrary one-to-one…
wyatt
  • 317
2
votes
1 answer

For the Compactness Theorem for Propositional Logic, show that the extension is not unique.

During the proof of the compactness theorem, from an arbitrary finitely satisfiable set $\Sigma$ of WFFs, we construct a finitely satisfiable set $\Delta\supseteq \sigma$ such that for every WFF $\alpha$, either $\alpha\in\Delta$ or $\lnot\alpha…
max_b
  • 99
2
votes
1 answer

Question about maximally consistent sets in logic

Problem: Σ is "proofwise stronger" than a set Γ if {$\alpha$: Σ ⊢ $\alpha$} $\supseteq$ {$\alpha$ : Γ ⊢ $\alpha$ }. Show that for every maximally consistent set of propositions Σ, for every set Γ, either Σ is proofwise stronger than Γ or Σ $\cup$Γ…
Mark
  • 3,109
2
votes
1 answer

Mathematical logic - alternative of conjuncion AND

I want to know if the word "also" do the same thing like "AND"? For example, there's a statement like this: All the students who are good at Maths also work hard. Let M(x) = "x is good at Maths" W(x) = "x work hard" To rewrite the statement, i…
rMath
  • 81
2
votes
1 answer

Which quantifier to include while converting implication to disjunction

Given a statement: Anything anyone eats and isn't killed by is food, I formed a predicate for it like: $$ \forall x \forall y ~ \operatorname{eats}(x,y) \land \lnot \operatorname{killedby}(x,y) \implies \operatorname{food}(y). $$ Now I want to…
2
votes
0 answers

Cut-elimination (transfinite induction base step)

I am having problems with the base step in a proof by transfinite induction. Consider a certain language $Z_{\infty}$, a language similar to PA but with an $\omega$-rule and a cut rule among its inference rules . I suppose the reader knows what a…
2
votes
2 answers

When is $(\forall x \in U, P(x)) \implies (\exists x \in U, P(x))$ false?

Consider the statement $$(\forall x \in U, P(x)) \implies (\exists x \in U, P(x))$$ Write down a domain $U$ and a predicate $P$ for which this statement is false. What property exists that can be true for all members in a group but false for one…
2
votes
4 answers

Proving equivalences

Here I have a proposition: ((¬p ∨ x) ∧ (p ∨ y)) → (x ∨ y) I am proving that it's a tautology but I wanted to know if what I am doing is correct. I'm just learning equivalences, I have tried to type it out as neatly as possible. Please give feedback…
GivenPie
  • 479
2
votes
1 answer

Deciding Consistency

Decide if the following subsets of Form are consistent: $$\{P_{1} \lor P_{2}, P_{2} \lor \neg P_{3},\neg P_{3} \lor \neg P_{4}, P_{3} \lor \neg P_{1}, \neg P_{2} \lor P_{4}\}$$ $$\{ P_{1} \to P_{2},P_{2} \to P_{3}, P_{3} \to \neg P_{1}, P_{4} \to…
user94284
  • 115